From: | gkripke@igc.org |
Date: | Tue, 21 May 1996 13:23:12 -0700 (PDT) |
Reply: | cpeo-military |
Subject: | THE GOOD, BAD, AND UGLY |
From: Gawain Kripke <gkripke@foe.org> Economics for the Earth A Friends of the Earth Publication On Issues Linking People, Prosperity and the Planet May 20, 1996 The Good, the Bad, & the Ugly Evaluating the House Budget Resolution On Thursday May 16, the House of Representatives voted along party lines to pass the Fiscal Year 1997 Budget Resolution. The House Budget Resolution kicks off the annual budget cycle, a complicated process that sets revenues, entitlements, and allocates federal funding. The Budget Resolution is only the first of many steps in the process, however, it sets the overall direction and delivers instructions on implementation. Most of the Budget Resolution is not a legally binding piece of legislation but rather a suggestive roadmap. In many respects, the Budget Resolution is a political document presenting messages for the party in power. So what does this year's House Budget Resolution say? Unfortunately, much of it sets the stage for a repeat of last year's "war on the environment." There is a peppering of interesting rhetoric and some budget cuts that environmentalists would support. We've divided it up into the "good," the "bad," and the "ugly." Ugly first: The Ugly The ugliest items in the House Budget Resolution largely reside in the assumptions that underlie the revenue and spending recommendations. These assumptions are described in the report accompanying the House Budget Resolution. The assumptions are not law, but they indicate the priorities of the budget-writers. The Budget Resolution would: * Open the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge for oil drilling. This is last year's dismal battle all over again. * Permanently repeal the 4.3 cent gas tax passed in 1993. This is one of the few tax measures on the books that help to reduce greenhouse gases. This gas tax was passed to reduce the federal budget deficit and repealing it would cut federal revenues by more than $30 billion over 6 years. * Eliminate federal operating support for mass transit and other cleaner transportation programs. * Phase out federal funding for energy conservation research and slash funding for solar and renewable energy programs. * Specifically fund the Department of Energy's Advanced Light Water Reactor nuclear program -- an egregious corporate subsidy for Westinghouse and General Electric to design and license nuclear reactors. The Bad The House Budget Resolution cuts funding for the critical "function 300", the Natural Resources and the Environment budget account. While the Administration's budget plan would increase spending for this account to $21.9 billion in FY97, the House Budget Resolution would cut this account to $20.5 billion, a cut of about $800 million from this year. Even more significant is what happens under the budget plans in the "outyears" until Fiscal Year 2002. The Administration budget would ratchet up this account by $2.2 billion from this year's budget. The House Budget Resolution will slash funding levels by $2 billion in FY02. Over the next six years, the House Budget Resolution provides $15 billion less than the Administration would for "function 300". (As a side note, the House Budget Resolution provides $25 billion more than the Administration for defense spending, "function 050.") To meet the House budget projections by FY02, federal environmental agencies such as the National Park Service, the Environmental Protection Agency, and the Fish & Wildlife Service will take deep cuts. These cuts are even more distasteful because the House Budget Resolution apparently provides an additional $700 million a year to Superfund, apparently dedicating new taxpayer funding for cleanups while letting polluters off the hook. The Good The report accompanying the House Budget Resolution has an interesting paragraph: "First, Do No Harm. There are many government programs that encourage or directly cause environmental harm.... It makes no sense for the Federal Government to subsidize environmental destruction on one hand while establishing laws, regulations, and bureaucracy to mitigate damage on the other." This is a good idea, and Friends of the Earth and many other environmental and taxpayer organizations have provided recommendations on how to "do no harm" in the Green Scissors '96 report. The House Budget Resolution proposes budget cuts similar to a few of our recommendations, including: * Clean Coal Technology Program. The House Budget Resolution would terminate future funding for this Department of Energy subsidy to the coal industry. * Flood Insurance Reform. The House Budget Resolution proposes reducing federal subsidies for flood insurance for certain buildings by 50 percent. * Fossil Energy Research and Development. The budget would wean the oil, gas, and utility industries from federal subsidies for research and development. * Army Corps of Engineers. The House Budget Resolution includes a general statement calling for a reduced Federal role in civil works. * Rural Utilities Service. The budget endorses reductions in this agency and identifies the electric and telecommunications portion of the RUS program as troubled areas. * Intelligent Highway System. The House Budget Resolution would eliminate the futuristic automated highway and telecommunications system development. * Recreation Fees. The budget report calls for increasing recreation fees at national parks and allowing these fees to be retained by the parks. The budget report actually quotes Green Scissors '96, although our recommendation would apply this concept to all federal lands. It was not our intention that recreation fees replace existing funding. The House Budget Resolution also calls for "concerned parties to identify ways to restore salmon runs to the Elwha River." However, this is a bit faint since the way has already been identified by concerned parties: removal of the dams on the river. President Clinton requested funding for this purpose. For more information, contact: Courtney Cuff, ccuff@foe.org, (202/783-7400 ext.207) or Gawain Kripke, gkripke@foe.org, (202/783-7400 ext.212) or visit the Friends of the Earth web page at http://www.foe.org/ | |
Prev by Date: DEFENSE SUPERFUND CHANGES Next by Date: Army Wants to Train on Nat'l Forest | |
Prev by Thread: DEFENSE SUPERFUND CHANGES Next by Thread: Army Wants to Train on Nat'l Forest |